PLJ 2021 Cr.C. (Lahore) 391
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--
----S. 498--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), Ss. 452, 447, 354, 148 & 149--Pre-arrest bail--Confirmed--House trespass--Pendency of suits between parties--Claim of possession by both parties--Un-explained delay in lodging of FIR--Joining of investigation by petitioner--Actual facts of case can be surfaced after recording evidence at trial--Petitioners had already joined investigation--No useful purpose would be served by handing over petitioners custody to police at this stage--Petition was allowed. [P. 392] A
Mr. Javed Iqbal Malik-I, Advocate with Petitioners.
Ms. Maida Sobia, Deputy Prosecutor General for State.
C.h. Mubashar Iqbal, Advocate with Complainant.
Date of hearing: 13.10.2020.
PLJ 2021 Cr.C. (Lahore) 391
Present: Ch. Mushtaq Ahmed, J.
MUHAMMAD ARIF and 2 others--Petitioners
versus
STATE and another--Respondents
Crl. Misc. No. 39150-B of 2020, decided on 13.10.2020.
Order
Muhammad Arif, Ijaz Ahmad and Husnain petitioners have prayed for pre-arrest bail in case FIR No. 339 dated 05.07.2020. registered at Police Station Satrah District Sialkot for the offences under Sections 452, 447, 354, 148, 149, PPC.
2. Arguments heard and record perused.
3. FIR was registered on the complaint made by Mst. Salma Bibi, who alleged that petitioners along with thirteen co-accused named in FIR and five unknown persons trespassed into her house, beaten the inmates, outraged modesty of complainant and others women and forcibly possessed over the house Stance of learned counsel for petitioners is that the house in question was purchased by petitioners from complainant’s father and they were already in possession thereof. Admittedly, Muhammd Iqbal co-accused has instituted a suit for declaration or in alternate for specific performance of contract against Ghulam Haider, father of the complainant qua disputed house. A suit for declaration qua the house in question has also been filed by complainant against her father and others. Both the suits are pending adjudication. FIR was registered after eight days of the alleged occurrence. Such delay has not been explained in the FIR. Both the parties claim complainant against her father and others. Both the suits are pending adjudication. FIR was registered after eight days of the alleged occurrence. Such delay has not been explained in the FIR. Both the parties claim their possession on the disputed land. In such backdrop, actual facts of the case can be surfaced after recording evidence at trial. Petitioners have already joined investigation. No useful purpose would be served by handing over petitioners, custody to police at this stage. Therefore, petition in hand is allowed and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to each of the petitioners is confirmed subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of
Rs. 1,00,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
(Y.A.) Petition allowed
0 Comments